A quick digression into the historical past of many peoples (and not only Dagestani) showed the existence of a system of measures and methods of moral self-purification of society. The existence of such a system and periodic reference to it were factors contributing not only to the self-preservation of an ethnic group and ensuring dynamic stability in society, but also to the prevention of possible social conflicts based on immoral behavior. Thus, in the traditional Dagestani society, a phased system of measures was developed that ensured moral and psychological stability in society. In many cases, these measures were of a preventive nature, and along with them, rather peremptory and harsh measures were developed for serious violations of public institutions, such as ostracism.

The term "ostracism" comes from the ancient Greek word "ostraca", i.e. a shard (a kind of bulletin) on which the name of the person being exiled was written. In Ancient Athens, ostracism had specific causes and goals and "was directed primarily against strong, powerful, powerful aristocratic leaders, against those of them who became so influential, began to stand out so much among their own kind that they were already perceived as a threat to the existing political system" [Surikov, 2006, p. 207]. Such representatives were exiled with universal consent for a longer or shorter term (nominally 10 years). [Surikov, 2006, p. 165].

The motives of ostracism among different peoples in the process of historical development diverged depending on the economic and moral and psychological priorities in society.

Ostracism among the Dagestani peoples, accordingly, had its own specific features, due to local moral, ethical, socio-economic, mental and other distinctive features. As a social phenomenon, ostracism emerged as a result of social needs and transformed along with society. Therefore, the ostracism of the early nineteenth century and the same phenomenon in its second half differ significantly both in form and motivation. In addition, ostracism existed independently of the social system both in the feudal state (for example, the Shamkhalstvo of Tarkov or the Avar Khanate), and in any union of rural societies, since the renunciation of a vicious member could occur in the same way.

Ostracism in Dagestan provided for two forms of getting rid of a vicious member: deprivation of life and physical alienation by expulsion from one's environment. Let us take a closer look at the causes of ostracism in traditional Dagestan society.

It is known that such acute social conflicts as murder, wounding and maiming, abduction of women or intercommunal conflicts on the basis of border violations, etc., as a rule, in most cases ended in a peace (maslaat), where the leading role was played by arbitrators and public diplomacy. However, there were cases when the resolution of conflict situations through the intervention of an arbitration party was not provided for at all. Such conflicts, for example, included homicide in the family in general and in the ascending line in particular, for such murders, as a rule,

page 57
Ostracism was envisaged in most Dagestani societies. This is how justice was administered in such a case in Kumyk societies. "When the father of the son or the son of the father, or the elder brother of the younger, or the younger of the elder, or the mother, or the sister were killed, and if there were no close people among them to intercede for blood, then the whole people shot at this murderer with a gun with curses. "He is not a man, he has no honor, he killed his father," the people said to the murderer, and he was not allowed to attend any gatherings. "He is a low creature," they said about him in the prince's Kunatskaya and did not let him go there" (Manai Alibek, 1927, p.82).

A member of a tukhum (clan) leading a vicious lifestyle was expelled from the tukhum or jamaat (community) in some societies, depending on what they had done, and in others they were allowed to take their own life, and this was the order in some Dagestani societies in the XIX century. it was saved. There were also societies where it was mandatory to expel an immoral member from their tukhum or Jamaat, and this procedure was codified in the customary law of these societies.

Thus, the rite of banishment by tukhum of its member, leading a vicious lifestyle, took place among the kaitags, it looked like this: "If one of the members behaves badly: steals, kills, then the tukhum is responsible for it up to three times. If a member of the tukhum does not improve, then it is killed or separated. The rite of separation is as follows: all members of the tukhum gather in a certain place, and strangers are also present. The Tukhum, by common agreement, draws up a paper with the following content: "We, the relatives of such and such a tukhum, separate such and such from our midst for his bad behavior, and from now on, if someone kills him or he kills, we are not responsible for his blood and will not seek his blood; does he steal? who is robbed or robbed - we are also not responsible for him, and, on the contrary, after us or him, if there is any property left, we have no right to him, and he also has no right to ours. In addition, after this day, he has no right to re-enter our tukhum and be a member of it. In witness whereof, we swear an oath on the Holy Qur'an and attach our fingers" " [Monuments..., 1965, pp. 19-20].

In the adats of the Gidatli societies, the ostracism of a vicious member was also codified, and the criminal was expelled not by the members of the tukhum, but by the entire Jamaat: "The person guilty of setting fire to the big bridge is fined 100 boilers and expelled from the Gidatli society. If someone beat up an exiled person, no compensation is required. If someone kills an exiled person, they are not responsible for their blood" (Gidatlinskiye adaty, 1957, p. 25). In this case, the motive for ostracism was economic considerations, since the big bridge connected the union of societies with the rest of the world, and the construction of the bridge was a labor-intensive process.

Accordingly, the Gidatli adats also provided for a strict attitude towards the village performer for providing assistance to the guilty person in non-payment of a fine, and as a punishment they defined "rejection by all fellow villagers and the whole society" [Gidatli Adats, 1957, p. 25].

Expulsion from the jamaat or tukhum was the ultimate punishment for a vicious member. The ostracized person was now an outlaw; he could be killed with impunity, and he no longer enjoyed the protection of the Tukhum or the Jamaat.

In villages. There was no custom to alienate Kuban from tukhum. Among them, if a person of vicious behavior came across in tukhum, he was punished and fined until he corrected himself, and if these measures did not work on him, he was killed [Monuments..., 1957, p.20].

The moral and psychological climate in traditional societies largely depended on the purity of sexual relations. In this regard, the honor of a woman was jealously protected by all tukhum, since her loss adversely affected the reputation of relatives, especially the male part of it. Accordingly, the abduction of a woman was severely punished, and even the murder of the abductors of a woman was allowed when their relatives pursued the abducted woman.

page 58
In accordance with the stereotype of behavior that developed in the traditional socio-cultural space of Dagestan, it was allowed to kill those caught in adultery with impunity, which was also codified in the adat codes of many societies. Such, for example, is the adat of the Keleb Union of Rural Societies: "If a brother kills his sister, or a husband kills his wife, or a cousin kills his cousin, finding them with strange men, then their blood will not be searched for, it is lost" [Adaty..., 1965, p.72].

In such cases, the mandatory condition was the deprivation of the life of both adulterers, both men and women, otherwise blood feud was provided for by the relatives of the murdered person. Such a stereotype was generally accepted, even if it was not prescribed in the norms of customary law of unions of societies.

The attitude towards adultery committed with a married woman was particularly strict, for which the Sharia provided for stoning. Here is how, for example, adulterous relations were regulated in the legal regulations of the Transcaucasian Avars as early as the middle of the XVIII century: "If two adulterers - meaning, of course, a man and a woman - one party will be legally married, and the other party will not be in it, then the married party will not be married. the unmarried party should be stoned to death, and the unmarried party should be given a hundred lashes, blackened in the presence of a large number of people, and put on a donkey backwards and repeatedly circled in this form in front of the elite of this people. (They also performed such actions after Friday prayers right in front of the Jara Cathedral Mosque or at the gathering place of residents of this country) " [Khrestomatiya..., 1999, p. 54].

The above procedure was not only a prescription, but also found practical implementation in life. Thus, there is information dated 1904 that in Dagestan, a traitor was strangled between two boards. "According to the Mohammedan law, 100 lashes were required for seducing a girl, and for seducing a married woman, stoning" [Ladyzhensky, 1929, p. 173].

Adultery was immoral and fraught with the risk of illegitimate offspring, which according to Sharia and in the views of the peoples of Dagestan was considered an unforgivable sin. Therefore, illegitimate children were almost always killed without any penalties.

In all societies of Dagestan, a reverent attitude developed towards religious shrines, including mosques, and there were societies where stealing from a mosque was considered sacrilege, and those who committed such an act were also outlawed. Thus, in the Tsudakharian society, a person guilty of stealing from a mosque "in addition to paying 12 times more than the value of the stolen goods is expelled from society and is considered a kanli (bloodline, blood enemy) of all residents of the village where the crime was committed" [Komarov, 1868, p.21].

In general, theft among mountaineers was considered a crime against the person and personal property, which were strictly protected by Sharia and adat. Accordingly, a thief caught in the act could be killed with impunity.

Hospitality among the peoples of Dagestan, according to the descriptions of all European and Russian authors of the XIX century, was the first virtue, and for the murder of a guest, it was also allowed to kill the criminal with impunity.

It should be noted that adat norms and sharia only rarely prescribed the use of the death penalty and did not prohibit it if a rural society or tukhum applied this measure against its depraved representative.

Among all the peoples of Dagestan and Chechnya, violation of maslaat was also considered an immoral act, followed by ostracism. So, the person guilty of violating the maslaat (in Chechens - mashar) among the Aukhovites and Ichkerians, "the people give themselves up to the curse", which is returned under Mashar [Leontovich, 1882, pp. 130-131]. Among the Kumyks, the murderer was outlawed for such a crime, and he could be killed with impunity: "For the murder of a blood relative, after reconciliation took place with him, according to the custom of kumyks in Tar-

page 59
In the Kovo district, as well as in the Mekhtuli Khanate, the guilty were considered enemies of the entire society, and anyone could kill them..."[Ladyzhensky, 1929, p. 163].

The attitude towards an immoral member of the tukhum was equally harsh among all the peoples of the North Caucasus, which was edifying in nature. So, traditionally in Abkhazia, a person who committed violence was a disgrace to the family, and it was considered right when he was deprived of life by his own relatives. When relatives of the rapist commit a massacre, the elders of the family forbid mourning him or wearing mourning for him. Such a person is not buried in a cemetery, the grave is dug not far from the house, and then leveled to the ground [Abkhazian Themis..., 2000].

Accordingly, the Chechens also had a peculiar form of ostracism. A deterrent to immoral behavior in traditional Chechen society was the threat of public damnation. "In Chechnya, a sign of ostracism was the construction of a pile of stones "in honor" of a person who violated the laws of society - karalag. It was held near the road and in public places, and everyone passing threw a stone there. Caralag could be erected at night in the yard of an antisocial person, and in the afternoon the owner dismantled the pile, but the next night it appeared again "(Berger, 1859, p. 69). This form of ostracism was more of a moral alienation.

Along with adat and shari'ah, the moral and moral foundations that developed in traditional societies had a significant impact on social relations, and accordingly, the status of an individual or a tukhum as a whole strictly depended on their moral reputation in the jamaat.

The fate of the outcast was terrible. Among the Ossetians, no one sat down with the parricide at the same table, no one drank from the same cup with him. His home and all his possessions were set on fire and destroyed to the ground (Anchabadze, 1979, p. 140-141). According to Yu. M. Botyakov, "the realization of one's own guilt is a difficult test that fell to the lot of an outcast who passed the renunciation rite, it broke the personality so much that, probably, only a few of this category could actually become abreks" [Botyakov, 2004, pp. 16-17].

A disenfranchised outcast was not only deprived of the right to hospitality. However, he was not put at the same table where the family dined or dined, but was taken to the darkest corner of the house: the remains of his food were immediately thrown out for the dogs to eat with the characteristic cry:" From dog to dog " (Anchabadze, 1979, p.140-141).

In Dagestani societies, the outcast was also not formally denied hospitality, but at the same time, a troublemaker who was rejected in tukhum or jamaat was also not needed in any other community. Among the Highlanders, the newcomer was called "aparag" with a touch of disdain and was treated accordingly. The Avars have a saying about such newcomers: "Aparagasul ruk-rosu ragIalda, hob-habal ragIalda", which means in Russian:"The house of the newcomer is on the outskirts of the village, and the grave is on the edge of the cemetery". In the position of aliens, depending on the crime committed, most often turned out to be criminals, i.e. those who committed murder under aggravating circumstances.

The physical alienation of an immoral member of a tukhum or jamaat in mountain societies was usually accompanied by moral ostracism. So, he could not run for elected positions in the jamaat or swear an oath for himself and be a co-witness for the purification of relatives during legal proceedings. Representatives of the Jamaat also avoided entering into marriage, trade or other business relations with a vicious member, and thus moral self - purification and maintaining cleanliness in the socio-cultural space at the micro and macro levels took place. Through alienation from the vicious circle, moral values and priorities were formed in the socio-cultural space.

As a rule, these values were based on such criteria as social justice, respect for older people and women, defending the honor and dignity of the representative of both their own and the tukhum or Jamaat, a developed sense of patriotism, priority of public interests over personal ones, bravery, bravery, etc.

page 60
Imam Shamil spoke very highly about the sense of justice of the mountaineers of Dagestan: "Any semblance of injustice, any insignificant but wrong action-from the depths of the soul outrages the mountaineer, who with the qualities of a predatory beast harbors a deep sense of truthfulness. This feeling either gives him the opportunity to die without grumbling and pain, or moves him to the most bloody episodes..."[Runovsky, 1989, p. 112].

No less reverent were the highlanders to protect their honor and dignity. As many 19th-century authors have noted, a developed sense of self-worth was an essential attribute of the mountain mentality. In this regard, V. P. Pozhidaev noted: "The Highlander is proud and imbued with great respect for his own person and no one, he will never allow himself to step on his foot. Therefore, he cruelly revenged himself for insulting his mother, sister, and wife, and many of our Russian peasants, soldiers, and Red Army soldiers found their graves in the Caucasian cities and backwaters for their "swearing" [Pozhidaev, 1926, p.101]. These moral priorities were valued in society, were a moral criterion, and were cultivated accordingly.

In traditional societies, status gradation has developed depending on the moral reputation of a person, a tukhum or a jamaat; whole jamaats have emerged that have gained a reputation for being honest, impartial and impeccable in moral and moral terms, whose mediation was resorted to when resolving disputes or mediating in peacemaking. So, residents of the shamkhalstvo of Tarkovsky applied to villages. Erpeli or Gubden; residents of the Mekhtuli Khanate - in villages. Okhli, residents of the Prisulak villages - to the villages. Zubutl of the Salatava Union of Rural Societies, kaitagtsy-in villages. Kisha and Urkarakh [Komarov, 1868, p. 8]. Representatives of these villages have always valued their reputation and maintained it.

In the second half of the 19th century, due to the final annexation of Dagestan to Russia, the stereotype of local behavior slowly underwent a transformation. There were still various vices in society, but now their punishment was already the concern of the Russian authorities, who, following the urgent requests of the residents of the societies, exiled the criminals to Siberia. So, in January 1888, the former exiled Hasan Magomed Ali oglu left the villages. Urakhi of the Darginsky district in his testimony noted: "In 1888, by the verdict of a society of fellow villagers for theft and bad behavior, I was expelled from the region and, by order of my superiors, settled in the Tambov province... (forever), but I escaped from there" [GARD, f. 2, op. 4, d.24, l. 9].

According to archival materials, there were many cases of escape from exile, and fugitives were often returned to the place of deportation. Alienation from society was widespread, as evidenced by a review of the Dagestan region in 1899: "The number of people exiled to the inner provinces and Siberia for various crimes in the reporting year was expressed in the following figures: 20 people were exiled to the inner provinces and 39 people to Siberia, but 45 of them belong to the mountain rural population" [GARD, f. 21, op. 1, d. 3, l. 64].

Cases from the past, motivated by the traditional way of Dagestan society, sometimes echo the events of recent years.

In the memory of Dagestanis, an odious case that took place in the conditions of economic collapse, moral devaluation and legal nihilism at the end of the last century in the city of Buinaksk is well preserved, when children were abducted and used as donors for organ transplantation. Criminals caught up with the people's punishment: right on the square they were killed, and their bodies were burned. The people took the people's avengers (parents of children) under their protection and protected them from prosecution by law enforcement agencies.

Or another identical case that took place in the village of Bashlykent, Kayakent district, in 2006, when the rapist of two young girls was also punished by the people; the people remembered forgotten traditions - the rapist was publicly deprived of his life and law enforcement agencies were not allowed to intervene. In such cases, moral ostracism

page 61
the entire family of the criminal was also subjected. Such cases, however, are quite rare, are a reminder of the vitality of folk traditions, and, what is noteworthy, where the law ceases to work or the law enforcement agencies do not fulfill their direct duties, the people return to their seemingly long-forgotten customs and regulations.

In the late 1990s, in one of the regional centers of the Republic of Dagestan, there was a case when a son killed his mother, caught in an adulterous relationship, and the adulterer escaped. The entire jamaat, led by a village mullah, took custody of the killer, and at their request, the law enforcement agencies left him without punishment.

Lynching, whether individual or collective, is naturally not a solution to the problem, and it is impossible to justify it from the point of view of the law. However, it must be recognized that such precedents are rooted in the ancient traditions of Dagestan society, in which ostracism contributed to moral purification, thereby contributing to the maintenance of dynamic stability in it. Recall that ostracism was expressed in two forms: in the physical alienation of the criminal from the tukhum or jamaat, or in his murder by the collective itself. The main reasons for ostracism were: murder in the family on the ascending line, adultery, sacrilege, incest. In addition, ostracism was punishable by: theft (if the thief was caught in the act), the murder of a woman's abductors ' relatives left without punishment, violation of maslaat, and some others.

list of literature

Abkhazian Themis: Rapists are executed by relatives / / Aids-inform. 2000. N 8.

Adaty Kelebskikh seleniy [Adats of Keleb villages] / / Monuments of customary law of Dagestan of the XV-11-XIX centuries. Kh. M. Khashaev, Moscow, 1965.

Anchabadze Yu. D. Ostracism in the Caucasus / / Soviet Ethnography. 1979. N 5.

Berge A. P. Chechnya i chechentsy [Chechnya and Chechens]. Tiflis, 1859.

Botyakov Yu. M. Abreki na Kavkaze [Abreks in the Caucasus], St. Petersburg, 2004.
GARD (State Archive of the Republic of Dagestan). F. 2. Op. 4. D. 24. L. 9; F. 21. Op. 1. D. 3. L. 64.

Gidatli adats / Preparation for printing by Kh. M. Khashaeva, M. S. Saidova. Makhachkala, 1957.

Komarov A.V. Adaty i sudoproizvodstvo po im [Adaty and legal proceedings on them]. Issue I. Tiflis, 1868.

Ladyzhenskiy A.M. Ocherki sotsial'noi embryologii [Essays on social embryology]. Rostov-on-Don, 1929.

Leontovich R. I. Adaty kavkazskikh gortsev [Adats of the Caucasian mountaineers]. Odessa, 1882.

Manay Alibek. Adats of Kumyks // Dagestan collection. Makhachkala, 1927.

Monuments of customary law of Dagestan of the XVII-XIX centuries / Comp. Kh. M. Khashaev, Moscow, 1965.

Pozhidaev V. P. Highlanders of the North Caucasus. Ingush, Chechens, Khevsurs, Ossetians and Kabardians. Kratkiy istoriko-etnograficheskiy ocherk [A brief historical and ethnographic essay]. Moscow-L., 1926.

Runovsky A. Zapiski o Shamil ' [Notes on Shamil], Moscow, 1989.
Surikov E. I. Ostracism in Athens, Moscow, 2006.
A textbook on the history of law and the state of Dagestan in the XVIII-XIX centuries. In 2 parts / Comp. T. M. Aitberov. Ch. I. Makhachkala, 1999.

Permanent link to this publication: